Quote of the Day: Trigger Option Edition

“But since most people like me are more likely to harm ourselves than to turn into mass-murdering monsters, our leaders should do more to keep us safe from ourselves. Please take away my Second Amendment right. Do more to help us protect ourselves because what’s most likely to wake me in the early hours isn’t a man’s body slamming at my door but depression, that raven, tapping, rapping, banging for relief. I have a better chance of surviving if I never have the option of being able to pull the trigger.” – Wendy Button in Please Take Away My Right to a Gun [via nytimes.com]

If she does not value her life, there is a good chance she doesn’t value yours or your kids. I think the best course of action would be to lock this looney up until she can prove that she is not a danger to society. I hope that she does not have any children of her own.

Silly girl! No one has to take you right to self defense away. It’s your CHOICE (I know girls like you are BIG on CHOICE) not to excessive that right. All of your rights can be nullified by YOU, should you be so pitiful, by simply not using them. Think of it this way, “It’s not a gun, it’s a CHOICE”, Now, if you would, please, FOAD.

Richard is right. Everyone isn’t cut out to be a grownup. She needs parental supervision or protective custody and obviously hasn’t seen a NICS form which explains that her “leaders” have already specified that she isn’t allowed to own a firearm.

Someone should tell her that NOLO.COM sells Power of Attorney forms for around $20.00. She could just get one of those, and sign away all of her adult responsibilities. Probably would be the best thing for her and society.

Perhaps it’s time for another petition: For the safety of herself and others, please confine Wendy Button in a mental institution before she goes and kills someone.

This is one of the most insane wanna be Zyklon-B sniffers I have ever come across. Just look at the wild eyes on this suicidal libtard buffoon.
She/he/it should at least have the courtesy to off themselves before trying to take us with them by trying to instigate these would be takeovers by the state.

Want to give up your rights, that sounds reasonable and easy. Simply don’t buy or have guns, no one is obliging you to do so. Now how about not trying to remove other’s right? You know rights people other than want to have and exert.

I’m really thinking the issue is not some oogie-boogie evil conspiracy to control us, but plain and simple ineptitude and idiocy.

I was kind of hoping “the Raven” would pull the trigger for her. What an idiot. Another “Save me from myself” Liberal RETARD. If you can’t trust yourself with a gun in the house then you also shouldn’t reproduce or own a car.

She can live in glorious non-gun world where her chances of survival are slim to none.

EDIT: I do have to say thank you to her for her honesty. Not often do you get the truth about why liberals hate guns and this is it. They project their own fears onto everyone else. “I’m not stable enough to own a gun so how is anyone else?” “If I had access to a gun the next redneck in a SUV would be shot dead for polluting and not buying a Prius. Blood in the streets!”

Or move to the UK where her Benevolent Dictators will be monitoring her well-being 24/7 via CCTV, she won’t be allowed to even think of possessing something that could possibly be used for violent purposes, and she can be raped twice as often as in the US.

The less guns in good people’s hands, the bolder criminals are. The bolder the criminals are, the more crimes occur. The more crimes occur the more people demand the state do something. The more the state does something the less liberty there is until there is none at all. At that point the worst criminals reveal themselves to be the ones in charge and no one has any means of effectively resisting them.

I wasn’t surprised to see someone write an article like this. I was surprised at how many commenters supported her idea though. Are there REALLY that many whiny people in this country, who shudder at the thought of personal responsibility, which includes knowing when NOT to own a gun(or knife, or rope, etc.)? If they all want to subject themselves to the federal nanny state, go ahead. Just don’t force it (or the costs) on the rest of us, please.

You literally just revoked your adulthood. You announced to yourself and to the world that you are incapable of taking care of yourself. You don’t trust yourself to not kill yourself so you’re, literally, asking to government to protect you from yourself. Watch out for those Happy Meals, I hear they have small parts that you might choke on.

Lady, you need therapy. And drugs, strong ones. Like, “You have to take birth control while you’re one these cus if you get pregnant your baby will have have two heads and spit fire balls.” drugs.

Having read the original article, I think she did the correct thing by not buying a gun. Knowing she has a mental illness and acting responsibly was the correct action on her part. Access to a gun does not make one suicidal, just more likely to succeed if used. However, demanding that the rest of us be banned from making the choice to own guns is within her 1A rights. Misguided ,but her right; protected by the 2A.

I personally give the columnist credit for two things: being honest about her desire to delegate her safety to others, and not hiding her desire to be disarmed with some pseudo-BS crime control rationale.

At the end of the day all the anti-gunners feel the way she does; namely, that firearms are tools to powerful to be trusted to “ordinary folk”. Such people consider the 2nd Amendment to be a right too dangerous to exercise. They view the RKBA as being tantamount to a Consitutional right for a teenager to own a 500hp Dodge Viper.

They think owning a gun is too dangerous for them to exercise, so naturally its too dangerous for everyone. Such thoughts are why people like Hitler get elected into office.

Perhaps she is correct. People with demonstrated mental disease should be banned from owning guns. It actually sounds reasonable.

But it should go further. No cars, potentially deadly medications…

Claiming she should take responsibility for herself ignores the truth of depression. That’s why it’s categorized as a mental disease. A person can be committed for psychiatric treatment involuntarily if there is reason to believe she is dangerous to herself or others. This is a reasonable exception to due process and other constitutional protections. However, and this is critical, in involuntary commitments, there is an immediate process to ascertain if the person really requires such treatment. The courts have to decide [in Maryland, in a situation I was involved in, the appeal had to be heard within 24 hours] if the commitment is justified.

Thus, indeed a mental health professional should be able to put her on a no-buy list, with the critical condition that she can appeal and expunge the listing. In fact, in her “I couldn’t control myself” situation, there should be a way for her to put herself on that no-buy list, and it would require a court ruling to remove her from that list.

Result: she is protected, at no cost to mentally stable citizens.

Edit: note that in the vast majority of “mass” killings in recent history, the perpetrator was on or was withdrawing from psychoactive medications.

“People with demonstrated mental disease should be banned from owning guns. It actually sounds reasonable.”

You, sir, are as tragically ignorant and misguided about mental illness as Bloomberg is about guns. There isn’t a shred of “reasonable” about it.

“Thus, indeed a mental health professional should be able to put her on a no-buy list”

This one is truly stupefying. You’re actually advocating putting millions of people’s gun rights in the hands of liberal doctors? Just about every medical association, and the majority of their members, in existence is on record as supporting the Brady’s agenda.

“This is a reasonable exception to due process and other constitutional protections.”

There is absolutely NO REASON EVER to abrogate an individual’s Constitutional protections. You’re saying that it’s ok to ditch due process for someone who MIGHT do something when even people who HAVE done something are guaranteed it.

If this woman is so worried about what she might do then she should voluntarily commit herself. It’s all about personal responsibility.

I have a better chance of surviving if I never have the option of being able to pull the trigger.

You do have that option. Just as the alcoholic has the option of never driving drunk, the addict has the option of never shooting up, or the morbidly obese have the option of staying away from fast food and ice cream. Don’t buy a gun. If you don’t have one around, you won’t be tempted to use it. It’s just that simple.

The Second Amendment doesn’t say you HAVE to own a gun; it merely gives you the right to do so if you wish. You can personally give up your Second Amendment right any time you want to, and no one will think the less of you for it. However you do NOT have the right to insist I give up mine any more than I have the right to insist you give up your First Amendment rights because what you say or publish may inflame someone with severe anger management issues and cause them to go on a rampage.

Rich lberals suggest such things because it’s a moot point for them. They either already have guns themselves, or else have armed bodyguards and live in gated communities, or simply don’t believe that the issues are real. Howsoever, they consider themselve insulated and immune from the consequences of disarmament. Hence, taking away rights, hardly any heroic sacrifice, is merely an irrelevant non-issue to them personally. Moreover, it reflects an immense disdain for one’s countrymen to presuppose incompetence and self-injury as the predominant characteristics of gun ownership.

As for the lady’s personal mental troubles, well, I can’t refute them and I won’t disrespect her on that basis. I hope she gets the help she needs; keeping mindful of the fact that suicide rates are largely independent of the means of suicide. That is, take away the guns, and the desperate and determined will still find ways to implement their final decision; whether in solitary surrender or murderous rampage.

As a compromise, I would definitely consider “pre-commitment” as an option for the vulnerable to protect themselves. That is, all they’d have to do is get a note from their doctor documenting that this patient believes they lack impulse control. So in a moment of rationality, as during a doctor visit to re-up on their psych meds, they can insert their own little note into their own FBI file barring them from a “Proceed” result from NICS. That way they’re freed from gun ownership and saved from themselves. Meanwhile, the rest if us serious, sane and sober-minded gun owners can exercise our rights unmolested by the nanny state.

Since she’s divesting herself of her rights I’d like to take her 19th Amendment right away. She’s clearly not responsible enough to pull the lever to vote and likely doing so is what brought us to this place to begin with.

I have great empathy for people suffering from depression, but at the end of the day, it stops when people begin using it as an excuse for stuff. Go to therapy, excercise, eat right, and change your life. Learn to live ine world, dont expect it to change to suit you.

“My depression appeared for the first time in the late ’90s, right before I began writing for politicians. . . . . . but I had an episode when my depression did come back in full force in the early winter of 2009, after I made a career-ending decision and isolated myself too much; on a January night in 2010; and again in May 2012, after testifying in the federal criminal trial of John Edwards, my former boss. ”

DING DING DING!!! WE HAVE A WINNER! She looks like the former Mrs. John Edwards. I wonder if Johnny and her had a little thang going on?? He probably lied to her like all of his other women and now she hates all men because of it. . . . .

What shocked me was the chorus of “Amen’s” in the comments section of the NY Times article. At some level, I understand that NYT readership is a self selected slice of extremist liberalism, but it’s nonetheless disheartening that so many comments applauded her “bravery”, and second her plea to strip 2A rights from an entire nation to protect her… from herself!

Wendy Button was Obama’s speech writer during 2008 until she left citing his subtle sexist (and emotionally hurtful) remarks against accomplished women such as Hillary and Sarah Palin. Apparently, at least at the time, it also motivated Wendy to leave the Democrat Party. I get the sense little Wendy is the messed-up super-sensitive creative artistic type.

Wendy describes herself as a petite woman, suffering from depression, and living alone with her 100lb dog . Why am I not surprised? Wendy probably should not have access to a gun. In her article, she wasn’t calling for banning the 2A though she supports all of Obama’s recent moves to limit or violate the 2A rights of others. Wendy has clearly not thought it through very deeply since places such as Japan where guns are banned has a higher suicide rate than America where guns can be acquired.

I feel sorry for Wendy since she seems like a messed up, depressed, highly sensitive woman that, at times, needs a caretaker much like children do.

Sounds like someone is crying out for help. Shes obviously depresed if shes so worried about taking her own life. Im pretty sure there are places to help people like that but right now they are full up with five year olds who play with toy guns.

A fine example of someone who would have been a good, obedient subject of King George III.“Give me your weapons!”
Check.“You shall pay me excessive taxes and have no representation!”
Check.“Bow to the King!”
Check.“Now get back to that field & work your fingers to the bone so I can continue to live in the royal manner to which I’ve become accustomed!”
Check.

Since I don’t want a gun, you can’t have one either. Since I am willing to give up my rights, You must give up your rights also. Since I am not mentally stable enough to own a gun, You must not be mentally stable either. I want to be able to make decisions for myself and I want to make them for you, too.

Nearly all of you missed Ms. Buttons’s point. She recognizes that because of her problems with depression she does not want access to a gun. Kudos that she takes this stand. Now, her willingness, by the hand of government, to deprive the mentally competent from owning any tool or machinery they can safely and thoughtfully use is a sad commentary on her sense of responsibility toward her fellow man.

Those of you who make the angry, rage-filled suggestion that she go ahead and kill herself should be ashamed. You exhibit an extreme lack of caring and concern for your fellow man. What is just as bad is that in this time of trial for gun owners, you lend credence to the gun grabbers view that gun owners are insane. Comments like this will make it easy for some government paid mental health person to decide you are not competent to own a gun. Please moderate your comments and be more thoughtful in expressing them. This sort of thing does not do our side any good.

She recognizes that because of her problems with depression she does not want access to a gun.
So who’s forcing her to own or have access to a gun? No one. Nor is anyone stopping her from getting the psychological help she may need, something I certainly favor.

Perhaps some people are being a bit testy on the topic, but there’s a real reason why.

If she really does, as she states, want to surrender her right to buy or possess guns, all she has to do is go to a pshink and then a court and have herself adjudicated as mentally incompetent. Here, allow me to quote the question “f” off a form 4473 Part 1, revised April 2012:

“Have you ever been adjudicated mentally defective (which includes a determination by a court, board, commission or other lawful authority that you are a danger to yourself or to others or are incompetent to manage your own affairs)OR have you ever been committed to a mental institution?”

Right there, we can see it spelled out how she can surrender her Second Amendment rights. Get herself adjudicated or committed, and she’s done. She doesn’t need to mess with anyone else’s rights. There is already a legal procedure made just for people like her to do what she wants.

Once again, a gun control activist displayed her ignorance of the actual law.

Aaaaaand….. the NYT has closed the comments on the article. It looks like they were getting too many that disagreed with her so they did what every liberal organization that hides behind the First Amendment wants do – cut off anyone else’s right to express opposing an viewpoint.

“I am too stupid to operate a simple mechanical device. Please take away my guns. While you’re at it, take away my driver’s license, as my ineptitude with even moderately complex machines is considerable. Please also require a licensed chef to prepare my meals as I am likely to burn my house down if I try and use the stove. Finally, since I am so unbelievably stupid, take my pillows away too. I am not smart enough to roll back over in my sleep if I roll my face into my pillow, and will surely suffocate.”

I’m not bitter, Ms. Button. I’m just trying to protect you. You said it yourself: You don’t know what’s best for you.

THIS is one of the kinds of people who we really need to start cracking down on with regards to mental health issues. Her attitude is, frankly, scary. She’s depressed, and she sounds like she’s going to crack.

She WANTS her gun rights taken away. So fine, she can choose not to have a gun, and she can choose to have herself listed among those who, because of mental illness, should not own a gun. And she can spend all the time she wants in therapy or in a padded room without anyone ELSE fearing that SHE might pull a trigger.

As for me, I have the same rights as she does, so I choose to own guns and be responsible about it. We do NOT need the government protecting us from ourselves. We need to ensure that WE are enabled to protect ourselves from the government.

Why why WHY is it always the liberal, usually anti-gun people that say, “I cant own a gun, I would shoot myself.” Or the ever popular, “I cant own a gun, I would get mad and start shooting people.”

Last time I checked, no one was forcing you to buy a gun if you are such a danger to yourself and others. That doesnt mean everyone is not fit to own a gun. Just that you may need to seek professional help for your mental health problems.

“I have a better chance of surviving if I never have the option of being able to pull the trigger.”
We’ll be glad to take that option away from you, but what you may think of your chance of surviving is irrelevant to my chance of surviving.

This idea that we must save everyone from themselves is stupid. If a person wants to kill themselves they should not be stopped by society. Making suicide or attempted suicide an imprisonable offense is totalitarian.

If the family wants to deal with them? Fine. Just don’t tie up my tax money.

If you follow her logic, we would need to ban guns, bathtubs (water), most medications, anything poisonous, rope, garaged cars, plastic bags, buildings over two stories, knives and/or razors, electricity and plastic bags. I am sorry that she struggles with depression. She has let that cloud her thinking and now also struggles with common sense. I feel bad for her, but… really?

So, Wendy Button’s options are clear. Take responsibility for herself and, if she fears she might use a gun to end her life, don’t buy a gun. Or buy one and use it to end her life. Or don’t buy one and hang herself, or jump off a high rise, or overdose on barbiturates, or throw herself in front of a train, whatever. Or seek treatment for her depression. Or not. I, personally, don’t feel I bear any responsibility for keeping her alive or killing her. It’s all up to her.

Another tip-off that this is a piece of fiction is the almost instantianeous response to the the 911 call. Anybody who has had experience with DC 911 knows that this claim is BS. It was put in there to show people that when seconds count the police are a second away so you don’t need your gun.
Also the alleged attacker was not deterred buy the loud barking of a 100 dog. Few bad guys are going to chance the dog on the other side being a benign Newffie and not German Shepherd or Pitbull.

Either she is not telling us the whole story of it’s an outright lie. I am going with the latter.

Wait! who the hell is twisting her arm to exercise her 2ndA right? I’m not, are any of you. So why the hell do I have to give up my rights so this woman doesn’t check herself out of the heard? I’ve read some stupid quotes, but this one takes the damn cake and asks for seconds!